Search results

This paper aims to conceptualise the residential and psychiatric hospital as a space where criminality and social harms can emerge. Because of recent media scandals over the past 10 years concerning privately-owned hospitals, this study examines the lived experiences of service users/survivors, family members and practitioners to examine historic and contemporary encounters of distress and violence in hospital settings.

The study consists of 16 biographical accounts exploring issues of dehumanising and harmful practices, such as practices of restraint and rituals of coercive violence. A biographical methodology has been used to analyse the life stories of service users/survivors (n = 9), family members (n = 3) and professional health-care employees (n = 4). Service users/survivors in this study have experienced over 40 years of short-term and long-term periods of hospitalisation.

The study discovered that institutional forms of violence had changed after the deinstitutionalisation of care. Practitioners recalled comprehensive experiences of violence within historic mental hospitals, although violence that may be considered criminal appeared to disappear from hospitals after the Mental Health Act (1983). These reports of criminal violence and coercive abuse appeared to be replaced with dehumanising and harmful procedures, such as practices of restraint.

The data findings offer a unique interpretation, both historical and contemporary, of dehumanising psychiatric rituals experienced by service users/survivors, which are relevant to criminology and MAD studies. The study concludes by challenging oppressive psychiatric “harms” to promote social justice for service users/survivors currently being “treated” within the contemporary psychiatric system. The study intends to conceptualise residential and psychiatric hospitals as a space where criminality and social harms can emerge. The three aims of the study examined risk factors concerning criminality and social harms, oppressive and harmful practices within hospitals and evidence that violence occurs within these institutionalised settings. The study discovered that institutional forms of violence had changed after the deinstitutionalisation of care. These reports of violence include dehumanising attitudes, practices of restraint and coercive abuse.

In this chapter, the author critically examines the relationship between sociology and the identities/experiences of disability and ‘mental illness’ (referred to throughout as distress). The author argues that despite sociology having an ethos of social justice and frequently producing critical accounts of inequalities – such as anti-racism and gender equality – it nonetheless uncritically reiterates the marginalisation of disability and distress. As such, sociology not only reflects the increasing ‘medicalisation of everyday life’ and shores up the essentialist discourses of genetics and neuroscience, but also consigns research and knowledge production about disability and distress to the medical sciences. The author challenges these sociological conventions and highlights the ways in which both disability and distress are socially structured, embodied experiences. The author argues that a sociological account of distress and disability are important not only in and of themselves, but also because they highlight the ways and means to challenge essentialism, inequality and the ever-narrowing definition of what is considered a normal or acceptable part of human experience. Furthermore, vibrant streams of user-led research, activism and practice-interventions – resulting in widespread social, legal and identity transformations – have emerged from the experiences of disability and distress. These user-led perspectives highlight the importance and potential of knowledge produced from the margins, not only for those experiencing disability and/or distress but also for the ways in which we perceive, theorise and research the social world more broadly.

The purpose of this paper is to present a focused viewpoint of coercion in psychiatry from the perspective of a survivor and activist.

This paper takes elements from and builds on three recent conference and seminar presentations presented in France and the UK in 2014: International Congress on Clinical Ethics Consultation 2014, Paris: Comité Européen Droit Ethique et Psychiatrie, June 2014, Perpignan and Royal College of Psychiatrists’ Annual Congress, London 2014.

Coercion in psychiatry runs counter to the highest human rights standards, rules out genuine care and profoundly undermines trust.

Additional research from a user and survivor experience would offer a different and more grounded perspective of how coercion is actually exerted and experienced through, for instance, a narrative approach.

The paper is proposed from the viewpoint of a survivor of psychiatry and human rights activist. It is a contribution towards a more user/survivor oriented discourse in this area.

The purpose of this paper is to discuss human rights assessment and monitoring in psychiatric institutions from the perspectives of those whose rights are at stake. It explores the extent to which mental health service user/psychiatric survivor priorities can be addressed with monitoring instruments such as the WHO QualityRights Tool Kit.

The paper is based on the outcomes of a large-scale consultation exercise with people with personal experience of detention in psychiatric institutions across 15 European countries. The consultation took place via one focus group per country and extended to a total of 116 participants. The distinctive characteristic of this research is that it imparts an insider perspective: both the research design and the qualitative analysis of the focus group discussion transcripts were done by a social researcher who shared the identity of service user/survivor with the participants.

The paper highlights human rights issues which are not readily visible and therefore less likely to be captured in institutional monitoring visits. Key issues include the lack of interaction and general humanity of staff, receipt of unhelpful treatment, widespread reliance on psychotropic drugs as the sole treatment and the overall impact of psychiatric experience on a person's biography.

Because of the way participants were recruited, the research findings do not offer a representative picture of the human rights situation in particular countries. They point clearly, however, to new directions for human rights research in the psychiatric context.

This paper demonstrates the indispensability of experiential knowledge for not only securing and improving but also extending the understanding of human rights standards in psychiatry.

The purpose of this paper is to explore the case for a truth and reconciliation (T&R) process in the context of mental health services.

The approach is a conceptual review of T&R approaches; a consideration of why they are important; and how they might be applied in the context of mental health services and psychiatry. First, the paper sets out a case for T&R in psychiatry, giving some recent examples of how this might work in practice. Then it outlines potential objections which complicate any simplistic adoption of T&R in this context.

In the absence of an officially sanctioned T&R process a grassroots reparative initiative in mental health services may be an innovative bottom-up approach to transitional justice. This would bring together service users, survivors and refusers of services, with staff who work/ed in them, to begin the work of healing the hurtful effects of experiences in the system.

This is the first paper in a peer-reviewed journal to explore the case for T&R in mental health services. The authors describe an innovative T&R process as an important transitional step towards accomplishing reparation and justice by acknowledging the breadth and depth of service user and survivor grievances. This may be a precondition for effective alliances between workers and service users/survivors. As a result, new forms of dialogic communication and horizontal democracy might emerge that could sustain future alliances and prefigure the social relations necessary for more humane mental health services.

This article examines the relationships between antipsychiatric activism and feminism, paying particular attention to the civil liberties of mental health consumer/survivor/expatient (c/s/x) individuals in relation to mental health practices. It argues that a continually rigorous exploration of the complex (and at times uneasy) relationships between antipsychiatric activism, feminism and mental health practice is necessary and useful for pursuing social justice by working toward the diminishment of mental health inequalities. The article includes an overview of the ‘spectrum’ of antipsychiatric stances and a review of some of the literature covering the relationship between antipsychiatry and feminism, and uses cinematic and literary examples to highlight the complexity of addressing issues like medication ‘compliance’ and ‘non‐compliance’ among mental health users and consumers in biomedical contexts.

Post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) affects both civilian and military populations following wartime experiences. However, despite an abundance of research investigating civilian and military populations separately, much less focus has been given to synthesizing and integrating findings to describe how civilian and military war survivors are comparatively affected by PTSD. This review is broken down into three sections covering (1) risk factors associated with PTSD, (2) relationships between PTSD and mental health outcomes, and (3) protective factors that can attenuate PTSD and its effects. Each section covers findings for civilians and military personnel and highlights similarities and differences between groups.

This inspiring article describes a series of activities that have taken place in the UK over the past year (2001) aiming to generate interest in user/survivor/consumer‐run social enterprises. The writers want to let others know about these activities, about the survivor‐run businesses in Ontario, and hopefully to create more interest in this type of work/community initiative. As editor of this journal I hope that the article will provoke those of you already running user/survivor‐led businesses in the UK to rise to the challenge and write about your work for future issues. Can't let the Canadians have things all their own way… Bob Grove.

The leadership of people with lived experience of mental health problems is underdeveloped, when it comes to leadership in one's own recovery, at the service level, and at the systemic level. Unlike the mental health system, the user/survivor movement has a values base of empowerment and equality. But the movement has not yet created an explicit model of leadership based on these values. Conventional models of leadership have little to offer but critiques of it provide a good framework for users and survivors to build its own model of leadership upon. If user/survivor leadership is to thrive, new roles, practices and competencies need to be developed. At a deeper level, there needs to be philosophical, psychological and political shifts in service systems if user/survivor leadership is to ever take root. Furthermore, the leadership of empowerment and equality should pervade all the leadership in service systems and beyond.

Disabled women are reported to be between twice and five times more likely to experience sexual violence than non-disabled women or disabled men; when these are hate crimes they compound harms for both victims and communities.

This user-led research explores how disabled and Deaf victims and Survivors most effectively resist the harm and injustice they experience after experiencing disablist hate crime involving rape.

Feminist standpoint methods are employed with reciprocity as central. This small-scale peer research was undertaken with University ethics and supervision over a five year period. Subjects (n=522) consisted of disabled and Deaf victims and Survivors in North of England.

The intersectional nature of violence against disabled women unsettles constructed macro binaries of public/private space violence and the location of disabled women as inherently vulnerable. Findings demonstrate how seizing collective identity can usefully resist re-victimization, tackle the harms after disablist hate crime involving rape and resist the homogenization of both women and disabled people.

The chapter outlines inequalities in disabled people’s human rights and recommends service and policy improvements, as well as informing methods for conducting ethical research.

This is perhaps the first user-led, social model based feminist standpoint research to explore the collective resistance to harm after experiencing disablist hate crime involving rape. It crossed impairment boundaries and included community living, segregated institutions and women who rely on perpetrators for personal assistance. It offers new evidence of how disabled and Deaf victims and Survivors can collectively unsettle the harms of disablist hate crime and rape and achieve justice and safety on a micro level.